Replacement Refractor

[Nigele2]

Hi guys

Well I’m looking for a little help finding a scope to replace my trusty refractor. 

My 60/700 refractor has been great fun as I can easily hike with it on my shoulder up the hill to my dark spot about 700 yards from home.  (I can also manage my EP/filter bag and backpack with goodies and torch.  And I could carry a little more.)

And I can use it from indoors and have great fun with moonie and Jupiter without getting cold  .

And it is pretty good in daylight.

But in March it is off to a better place.

The reflector is fine on the patio and gives a slightly better view but so much hassle.  Uncomfortable to lug anywhere and the greater power is negated by LP near the house. Don’t get me wrong when the Kingsclare gazers club (me, wife and my mate Barry) get it on it is great to have two scopes.  But the power thing is a pain. And the GOTO is nothing but hassle and in any case half the fun is wandering the skies drawing star maps and seeing where the experts got it wrong  .  Yeah I know some of my arguments aren’t really reflector v refractor but it’s where I’m at.

So for 2/3 more years before I move to Spain I want a refractor and I don’t mind spending a bit. (sounds brash but my other sports I spend and it's gone.  With gazing the seconhand value is still there.  Well that's what I tell myself ) 

• Needs to be luggable up the muddy hill.  Current stand and telescope weight less than two kilos.  I could manage 5 kilos easily.
• Ideally needs real quality focuser so I can adjust delicately (seen some with double gearing?)
• Ideally with some cushioned/ratio/geared smooth movements vertical and horizontal. 
• At least 4” if not bigger.
• Bit more stable than current tripod (I can hide sandbags up the hill in the hedge rows and that might help I guess)  

So anyone any thoughts on makers who could fit the bill?  I keep seeing lots but difficult to know which are over priced and which are just well engineered.  I did see an English made one about 25 years old but can’t remember the name.  Think it was £500 or so.  But built to last.

Any one got time to ponder this and comment during the cloudy nights would be much appreciated.  Cheers Nigel

ps:  I had read a lot about imaging when I started but some kind soul here (and there are many) sent me a sketch.  It hadn't crossed my mind before but now my observation log is full of sketches.  Can't find the post but a big thanks to that fellow artist 

[moriniboy]

My ultimate grab and go is an Skywatcher Equinox 80 and a TAL wooden eq tripod, all in less than £300 second hand and light enough to be very portable.

I needed to convert the TAL mount to take dovetails though.

Sorry don't have any photos to hand.

Remember when you get to 4" plus the weight really becomes an issue for portability.

[nightfisher]

A 127mm Mak makes a good portable scope, but better suited to planets and Luna

[Moonshane]

my recommendation would be to get an AZ4 for your current reflector. you'd get one for maybe £120 used.

that way it's more portable, usable and enjoyable.

[nightfisher]

my recommendation would be to get an AZ4 for your current reflector. you'd get one for maybe £120 used.

that way it's more portable, usable and enjoyable.

Yes, the AZ4 works very well with a reflector, and any other type of scope for that matter, well said Shane

[Nigele2]

Tx guys for quick replies on this for me cloudy night.  Best I've managed tonight is a moth trapped in a street light with my recently arrived secondhand Meade 5000 9mm and x2.5 barlow but don't think that will go in the log.

The current trusty refractor is definately going with its' tripod so need the tube and stand.   That AZ4 looks the sort of thing.  As for the tube the problem is very similar specs but enormous price variation.  From my experiences so far it is the smoothness of movement and focuser that would add most to my enjoyment.  And yes appreciate that means weight.  But it is only 700 yards and down hill coming back 

And up there already with the current refractor I've had great times with Saturn, Jupiter and Mars.  DSO stuff has been limited but that is down to me not putting the time in to preparation.  Mind you I can do a mean sketch of the Seven Sisters.

BTT I'm convinced a 102mm is the way to go.  I see loads of such refractors in the £250 to £460 range.  I'm guessing if I'm patient, especially as the lighter nights arrive and people aren't thinking about the stars so much, I might get a bargain.  

But tx for stimulating the search.

[moriniboy]

Sorry forgot to mention that the TAL tripod can also be used in alt / az mode as well.

[Nigele2]

Sorry forgot to mention that the TAL tripod can also be used in alt / az mode as well.

Tx moriniboy.  You don't know by chance how much your combination weighs?

I've seen a

Skywatcher Evostar 120 

and the 

Skywatcher Startravel 120 (AZ3)

They seem in the right ballpark and at £359 and £249 list I could upgrade to a AZ4. 

Or this fellow at £460

TAL-100RS Refractor Telescope With Deluxe Heavy Duty EQ-5 Tripod

This fellow weighs 11.2 Kilos but (I need a donkey)

Starwave 6" 152mm Rich Field Achromat Refractor Telescope

I guess I could try the exhibition in London coming up soon.  For sure I could get an idea of movement and focussing controls

Sorry wittering away.  Onwards (and most importantly) upwards 

[moriniboy]

TAL tripod is on its hols at moment (borrowed),so lets assume the TAL tripod weighs 3kg

The following are scope weights incl rings and a dovetail (no carrying box, diagonal, finder or ep)

Ikharus 102ED is 5.2kg (570mm long)

Equinox 80 is 3.0kg (380mm long)

Used to have a TAL 100RS but did not weigh, I asume someone else will be able to supply this.

Hope this helps

[Moonshane]

other than binoculars I'd have thought that any scope system worth taking to a dark site would weight at least 10kg which is not really a lot to carry if you set it up correctly.

[Blazar]

TAL tripod is on its hols at moment (borrowed),so lets assume the TAL tripod weighs 3kg

Weight is 6kg (according to TAL) here, though that is just the tripod (no mount)?!?

When I have the RS on mine it is liftable with the tube, though not sure I would want to wander up a hill with it.... they quote the OTA as 4.3kg...though when you look at the total weight (including mount and tripod) it comes in at around 23kg all in..

[nicks90]

what about a celestron C5 xlt instead of a refractor? Its got a simillar/slightly bigger aperture to the other scopes you are considering, yet being an F10 wont give any CA like a fast lightweight frac and is well within budget if you mount it on an az4.

its also only 2.7kg and would probably work quite well on an az3 too. (I like the az3 as it has proper slow mo controls, unlike the panhandle on the az4 which i cant see being particularly useful for tracking objects at higher mags)

[AndyH]

Weights of Tal stuff, on this marvelous thread ......

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/171810-air-travel-with-1000mm-refractor/page-3

Andy.

[Nigele2]

Progress.  I'm getting a backpack stool which will take everything (EP/filter case, flask, spare torch, binos, marsbar).  less than £20  

Then experiments with flour bags upto 16kilos of scope, mount and tripod.  

The AZ4 with steel looks favourite based on info here and other threads : 8.1 kilos

And Sky Watcher 120T OTA  :  3.9 kilos

£396 new.  Would love to consider the Sky Watcher 150 (£465) or the Sky Watcher Equinox 80 as suggested by moriniboy (£520) but a bit beyond what I should spend.  I could do it if I sold the reflector but having two scopes is a nice feeling and despite not liking the GOTO I ought to experiment with it some more.  

I'll lose my current refractor mid March but soon after that viewing hours will be much less so I can take my time and watch to see if the secondhand market produces something but new would be nice 

Many tx guys I'm now fixed in thought.  And tonight clear skies predicted so where's that SM 

[Nigele2]

Hi again.  Anyone know anything about these?   Bresser telescope Messier AR-127S/635 EXOS-1/EQ4  

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bresser-telescope-Messier-AR-127S-EXOS-1/dp/B004YF81OY

Been offered one for just over £300 plus P&P.  Can't believe many pay £700 plus on Amazon as have seen it in Europe for just under 600 Es but at £300?????

Cheers 

[moriniboy]

At F5 with no ED glass it will show a fair bit of CA on bright objects.

More suited as an imaging scope but I stand to be corrected on this.

[Nigele2]

Tx moriniboy.  I see someone else asked about this scope and had no replies.  http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/205050-bresser-messier-127635-refractor-telescope/?hl=bresser

I can see at more than £550 in Euro land (and £700 on Amazon) it would not fit comfortably in a normal budget.  At that price there is plenty of choice of scopes well reviewed and liked.  

But the outlet letting them go at £300 I imagine is sitting on bankrupt stock or something similar.  Seems like a lot of scope for the money.

I'm getting really tempted to take the risk.   Talk me out of this please           

[moriniboy]

 Sorry but only you can answer this, are you attracted to it because its cheaper or it does what you require (or both), looking at your original list of requirements

• Needs to be luggable up the muddy hill.  Current stand and telescope weight less than two kilos.  I could manage 5 kilos easily. - this is 16kg
• Ideally needs real quality focuser so I can adjust delicately (seen some with double gearing?) - only single speed
• Ideally with some cushioned/ratio/geared smooth movements vertical and horizontal. - should be ok
• At least 4” if not bigger. - got this 127mm or 5"
• Bit more stable than current tripod (I can hide sandbags up the hill in the hedge rows and that might help I guess)  - should be ok

​As I mentioned previously CA could be a problem if you are going for the bright planets / moon

[Mr Spock]

From what you have read I take it you are wanting something to take advantage of dark skies as you can observe planets st home. What you really need then is aperture and wide field.

For the money I reckon a ST120 on an AZ4 is the ideal combination. Not too heavy, easy to set up and use and the ST120 is perfectly usable at low powers. With a decent wide field eyepiece you are good to go

[Nigele2]

 Sorry but only you can answer this, are you attracted to it because its cheaper or it does what you require (or both), looking at your original list of requirements

• Needs to be luggable up the muddy hill.  Current stand and telescope weight less than two kilos.  I could manage 5 kilos easily. - this is 16kg
• Ideally needs real quality focuser so I can adjust delicately (seen some with double gearing?) - only single speed
• Ideally with some cushioned/ratio/geared smooth movements vertical and horizontal. - should be ok
• At least 4” if not bigger. - got this 127mm or 5"
• Bit more stable than current tripod (I can hide sandbags up the hill in the hedge rows and that might help I guess)  - should be ok

​As I mentioned previously CA could be a problem if you are going for the bright planets / moon

mmm you're talking me into it.  As you say the bottom three are ok.   Ill still have my reflector for planets/moon.  

Having tested weight with bags of flour and with the addition of a seat/backpack I'm ok with 16kilos.  And solid built should help with stability.  Last night I know wind was up but I had some trouble with my flimsy tripod.

That leaves the quality of the focus control!!!  But at the price would I get much better ?  And at £300 would I get a good secondhand return?   Think so.

Mr Spock the ST 120 and an AZ4 was certainly on the list but is a little bit more expensive.  Alsot with the Bresser in my mind is that the list price is so much higher and people do buy them from several different outlets.  While there is little feedback all that exists is positive.  

Sadly it will have to be a gut decision after sunday lunch.

But moriniboy your 4 out of 5 is making me think it is a good option.  Can't be too greedy. 

[Nigele2]

ok bought it.  I know if I didn't I'd only go and spend more later.  And when my current friend (the refractor) goes I couldn't bear being left with just the reflector.  

If it turns out not to be good I'll have some fun with it and will probably get over half back no matter what.

Atleast there will soon be a report for it here good or bad.  

Thanks for all the input guys  esp moriniboy for the analysis of my thinking  

[nicks90]

let is know how you get on with it!

[Darren27]

Very interested to hear your opinion of the Bresser, I'm considering buying one myself.

Sent from my LT26i using Tapatalk

[haitch]

Bresser is the European arm of Meade - It is essentially the same as the Meade AR5s I think. Yes it is a lot of scope for the money at the price you paid.

The mount looks like an EQ3 (if the one on Amazon is the same as comes with yours) so well respected but I wouldn't a heavier scope on it.

Should be good for deep sky but as previous posters have said CA will be quite noticeable on brighter objects. You might benefit from a fringe killer filter...

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/achromat-semi-apo-filters.html

I think you'll enjoy that if you can carry it up the hill!

[Nigele2]

Well it arrived and there is a lot of it for £300 I think.  Good heavy solid greman engineering type feel to every part.  Rock solid. Including an unshakable tripod.  And even the focus control is smooth and rock solid. No chance of much vibration here.  Sadly beyond putting it together and looking at the fence at the bottom of the garden I can do little till the clouds clear 

It came via Rotterdam into the UK.  Says manufactuered in Europe.  Documentation and CD first in German and English and then 20 other languages.  Lots of warnings about not looking at the sun. And it can be collimated.   Very professionally wrapped and encased in polysterene.  And looks like I can do some imaging with it.  But I'm still suspicious of why a spanish guy in Cornwall is putting these out at £300.  Something is not right I feel but c'est la vie.  I will for sure have lots of fun with it what ever it may be

The proof of course will be in the testing and there is the possibilty of an hour tomorrow morning.  More to follow.